Delhi District Court
Sh. Munawer Ahmed Aged 45 Years vs Central Board Of Secondary Education on 24 May, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. MANOJ KUMAR, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-
RENT CONTROLLER (EAST): DELHI
CNR No. DLET03-000361-2018
CS No.: 243/18
1. Sh. Munawer Ahmed aged 45 years
S/o Sh. Mansoor Ahmed
R/o H. No. D-47, Street No. 10,
Mahanpuri, Maujpur, North-East,
2. Smt. Farzana Praveen aged 44 years
W/o sh. Munawer Ahmed
R/o H.No. D-47, Street No. 10,
Mohanpuri, Maujpur, North-East,
Delhi - 110053.
.........Plaintiffs
Versus
1. Central Board of Secondary Education,
(Through Its Secretary)
C.B.S.E. Building, Community Center,
Preet Vihar, Delhi - 110092
2. Govt. Girls Senior Secondary School No. 1
(Through its principal)
At B-Bock, Yamuna Vihar,
Delhi - 110053.
......... Defendants
Date of Institution : 13.03.2018
Date of reserving of judgment : 10.05.2022
Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 24.05.2022
CS No. 243/18 Page 1 of 16
Suit for Mandatory Injunction and Declaration
JUDGMENT
1. By this judgment, the court shall decide the present suit.
2. Vide order dated 16.07.2018, the application of the plaintiffs under Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 CPC was allowed and Government Girls Senior Secondary School No.1, B-Block, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi was impleaded as defendant no.2 in the present suit.
3. Succinctly stated, the case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff no. 1 namely Mr. Munawer Ahmed and plaintiff no. 2 namely Farzana Parveen are parents of Ms. Sheeba who has appeared and passed 10 th & 12th examination with Central Board of Secondary Education Delhi. The daughter of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 namely Sheeba is pursuing B.EL.ED (First Year) at present for the session 2017-18 from Aditi Mahavidyalaya College, Bawana Delhi, which is affiliated to Delhi University vide her/plaintiff's child Roll No. 1707024. It is further stated that the name of the plaintiff no.1 is mentioned as Munawer Ahmad in CBSE record, which has single alphabet error in his surname mentioned as "Ahmad" while correct spelling of his surname is "Ahmed". It is further stated that the surname of plaintiff no. 2 "Parveen" is not mentioned in CBSE record, due to ignorance CS No. 243/18 Page 2 of 16 of school authority. The full name of plaintiff no. 2 is "Farzana Parveen", where name of plaintiff no. 2 only "Farzana" is mentioned in the CBSE record.
4. It is sated that the daughter of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 namely Sheeba has appeared and passed Secondary School Examination vide Roll No. 8647460 in the year 2014-2015, and Senior Secondary Examination vide Roll No. 9630577 in the Year of 2016-2017 with CBSE Delhi. Significantly, son of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 namely Anas Khan is studying in boys school B Block Yamuna Vihar Delhi, which is affiliated to CBSE Board, and at present he is student of 11th Class, and correct name of his parents as Munawer Ahmed & Farzana Parveen are mentioned in CBSE record, therefore plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 request for aforesaid correction in their names.
5. The complete and correct name of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 were mentioned in school record as Munawer Ahmed and Farzana Parveen respectively, when their daughter was studying 9 th class for the session 2013-2014 in Govt. Girls Senior Secondary School No. 1 at Yamuna Vihar, Delhi 110053.
6. It is stated that on 24.08.2016 Principal of Govt. Girls Senior Secondary School No. 1 at Yamuna Vihar, Delhi 110053 had sent request CS No. 243/18 Page 3 of 16 letter for aforesaid correction on behalf of student namely Sheeba and on the request of plaintiff no. 1 to CBSE but official of CBSE had not drawn attention on it. Presently, the guideline for correction has been published in News Paper "Hindustan times" dated 12.11.2017 by the CBSE that corrections are allowed within 5 years from the day of issuing the education certificates. Present suit is being filled by plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 for aforesaid correction within time as per fresh guideline.
7. It is further stated that if the aforesaid correction in the name of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 is not allowed, then their daughter namely Sheeba shall suffer irreparable loss and damages, and her 10 th and 12th educational certificate shall remain with incorrect spelling for future. The aforesaid correction in the names of plaintiff no. 1 and no. 2 is very essential for the career of their daughter namely Sheeba.
8. It is further stated that plaintiff no. 1 has sent a legal notice under Section 80 CPC dated 24.11.2017 though his counsel by way of speed post to the defendant, which was duly served upon the defendant but the defendant has not given the reply of that legal notice to the plaintiff till date.
9. Thus, on the above stated grounds, the plaintiff has prayed for a decree of declaration in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants thereby declaring the name of plaintiff no.1 as Munawer Ahmed instead of CS No. 243/18 Page 4 of 16 Munawer Ahmad and to add surname with name of plaintiff no.2 as Farzana Parveen instead of Farzana in CBSE record of their daughter namely Shabeena in the interest of justice. The plaintiffs have also prayed for a decree of mandatory declaration in favour of plaintiffs and against the defendants thereby declaring the defendants to make single alphabet correction in surname of Plaintiff no.1 as Munawer Ahmed instead of Munawer Ahmad and to add surnane with name of Plaintiff no.2 as Farzana Parveen instead of Farzana in CBSE record for future and to issue the fresh marksheet and certificates for 10th and 12th class with correct names of parents in favour of student Ms. Sheeba.
10. The defendants filed written statement (WS) to the plaint, interalia contending that the Central Board of Secondary Education is a Society which was created pursuant to Government Notification. It is stated that CBSE also known as CBSE is an autonomous society, which is fully self-financed. It is stated that C.B.S.E frames its own rules and is governed by them. C.B.S.E has its rules and regulations regarding change of name/candidate father name/candidate mother name. It is further stated that the suit of the plaintiff is not tenable in view of the amended Rule 69.1 (i) of CS No. 243/18 Page 5 of 16 the Examination By-Laws of the Central Board of Secondary Education and the amended Notification dated 01.02.2018.
11 It is stated that application for correction in name of candidates/father/mother/guardians name will be considered only within five years of declaration of result. Defendant no.1 i.e C.B.S.E. has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of "Sajjad Barakat vs CBSE" in WP (C) No. 5967/2008.
12. It is stated in the WS of the defendant no.2 that suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable as the name of the plaintiff's cannot be changed in the record.
13. The plaintiffs filed replication to the written statement filed by the defendants.
ISSUES
14. The following issues were framed in the present matter:-
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for ? OPP
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of declaration as prayed for ? OPP
3. Relief.CS No. 243/18 Page 6 of 16
EVIDENCE:
15. In order to prove the case, Sh. Mrs. Sandhya Rani, Vice- Principal, Govt. Sr. Sec. School No.1 examined as PW-1. She brought the school record pertaining tot he student Sheeba. As per record, Sheeba was studying from class-VI in the year 2010 and has studied upto class-X in the y ear 2014-15. She filed attested copies of all the documents pertaining to the school record of Sheeba. She proved following documents:-
I) Ex. PW-1/X is the letter/communication dated 15.04.2019 of Smt. Shashi Bala, Head of School/Vice Principal addressed to the Court.
ii) Ex. PW-1/A is the copy of school leaving certificate of class-V.
iii) Ex. PW-1/B (colly two pages) is the copy of admission of withdrawal register of class-VI.
iv) Ex. PW-1/C (colly two pages) is the copy of admission for for class-IX.
v) Ex. PW-1/D is the copy of admission and withdrawal register of class-IX.
vi) Ex. PW-1/E is the copy of registration form of class-X for the year 2014- 2015.
vii) Ex. PW-1/F is the copy of list of candidates for class-X.
viii) Ex. PW-1/G is the copy of list of candidates for class-IX of the year 2015.
ix) Ex. PW-1/H is the copy of school registration wise list of candidates.
x) Ex. PW-1/I is the copy of letter dated 05.09.2016 of school to CBSE.
xi) Ex. PW-1/J is the copy of application dated 06.08.2016 by the plaintiff no.1 to school.CS No. 243/18 Page 7 of 16
16. Sh. Dhruv Narayan Superintendent was examined as PW-2. He brought the summoned record i.e. original tabulation registers of the year 2015 and 2017. Copy of the relevant page of the said register of the year 2015 containing the relevant entry pertaining to Sheeba D/o Munawer Ahmed is placed on record and the same is Ex.PW2/A (OSR) and it contains the relevant entry at point A. He also proved the copy of the relevant page of the said register of the year 2017 containing the relevant entry pertaining to Sheeba and the same is Ex.PW2/B (OSR) and it contains the relevant entry at point A.
17. Sh. Sh. Munawer Ahmed was examined as PW-3. He tender his evidence by way of affidavit which is Ex. PW-3/A. He also relied upon documents exhibited as follows:
i) Ex. PW-3/1 (OSR) is the copy of his Aadhar card.
ii) Ex. PW-3/2 (OSR) is the copy of first page of performance profile of class-9th of the his daughter Sheeba for the year 2013-14
iii) Ex. PW-3/3 is the copy marksheet of class-10th of Sheeba for the year 2014-15 (already A-1)
iv) Ex. PW-3/4 is the copy of marksheet of class-12 th of Sheeba for the year 2016-17 (Already A-2)
v) Ex. PW-3/5 is the copy of birth certificate of Sheeba.
vi) Ex. PW-3/6 is the copy of the Aadhar card of Sheeba.
vii) Ex. PW-3/7 (Colly) is the copy of legal notice dated 14.11.2017.CS No. 243/18 Page 8 of 16
viii) Ex. PW-3/8 is the copy of online notification of CBSE in Hindustan Times dated 12.11.2017.
ix) Ex. PW-3/10 is the copy of marksheet of class-10th of Anas Khan.
x) Ex. PW-3/11 is the copy of application dated 06.08.2016 sent by him to the defendant no.2 and which contains the original stamps of the defendants.
18. Sh. Farzana Parveen was examined as PW-4. She tender her evidence by way of affidavit which is Ex.PW-4/1. She rely upon documents Ex.PW-4/2 which is Aadhar card of Farzana Parveen and mark-A is her Ration card (Ex.PW4/3 is accordingly de-exhibited).
The plaintiff's evidence was closed on 10.12.2019. The defendants's evidence was closed on 18.02.2020.
19. This Court has heard the final arguments advanced by the respective counsels for the plaintiff and the defendant no.1 i.e C.B.S.E and the entire record is carefully perused.
APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE AND LEGAL POSITION:
20. The Issue-wise findings are as under:-
CS No. 243/18 Page 9 of 16
Issue no. (i ) and (ii) i. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of declaration as prayed for? OPP and ii. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for ? OPP
21. Both these issues are interconnected, hence this Court shall discuss and decide them together. The onus to prove both these issues was upon the plaintiffs.
22. Counsel for the Plaintiffs has argued that name of the plaintiff no.1 has been wrongly mentioned in the CBSE record of his daughter as "Munawer Ahmad" instead of "Munawer Ahmed" It is further argued that surname of plaintiff no.2 is not mentioned in CBSE record of her daughter as full name of plaintiff no.2 is "Farzana Parveen" whereas in CBSE record, name of plaintiff no.2 is mentioned as "Farzana".
23. Counsel for the defendant no.1 i.e C.B.S.E submitted that the suit is not maintainable as per Rule 69.1 (i) of the amended C.B.S.E. Bye- Laws, amended as on 25.06.2015 and 01.02.2018 which do not permit any change in name after publication of the result of the candidate. CS No. 243/18 Page 10 of 16
24. Ld. Counsel for the defendant no.2 submitted that name of the plaintiffs cannot be changed in the record of the defendant no.2. It is further contended that plaintiffs got their daughter namely Sheeba admitted in the school of defendant no.2 in class-6th in the year 2010 and has submitted school leaving certificate of BLS Public School, Mohan Puri, Delhi-110053 in which the name of the plaintiffs is written as Munawer Ahmad and Farzana. It is further contended that plaintiffs have filed the admission form and defendant no.2 had sent the name as mentioned in their record with the CBSE for class-10th and 12th. It is further contended that CBSE is the competent authority to change the name of plaintiffs and defendant no.2 has nothing to do in this matter.
25. Counsel for the plaintiffs contended that plaintiffs have sufficiently proved their case and grave injustice would be caused to them in case, their names are not corrected from "Munawer Ahmad" to "Munawer Ahmed" and "Farzana" to "Farzana Parveen" respectively.
26. Perusal of the testimony of PW3 shows that plaintiff No.1/PW3 proved Aadhar card/Ex.PW3/1, birth certificate of Sheeba/Ex.PW3/5, Aadhar card of Sheeba/Ex.PW3/6, performance profile of class-9th of Sheeba/Ex.PW3/2, class-10th grade sheet-cum-certificate of performance of Anas CS No. 243/18 Page 11 of 16 Khan/Ex.PW3/10. Perusal of these documents/exhibits shows name of the plaintiff no.1 as "Munawer Ahmed".
27. PW4 proved her Aadhar card which is exhibited as Ex.PW4/2. Perusal of Ex.PW4/2 shows her name as "Farzana Parveen".
28. PW1 has proved admission form of class9 th and same is exhibited as Ex.PW1/C. She has also proved admission and withdrawal register of class 9th which is exhibited as Ex.PW1/D.
29. Perusal of theses documents shows that name of the plaintiffs have been correctly mentioned as Munawer Ahmed and Farzana Parveen. Though, in their crossexamination, they admitted that in school leaving certificate Ex.PW1/A, their names were written as "Munawer Ahmad" and "Farzana". In crossexamination of PW3, he specifically stated that he has been continuously requested the school that the particulars of his daughter are incorrect and same be corrected, however, no one heard his grievance. He also specifically stated that mistake is on the part of school and the CBSE. In crossexamination of PW4, she admitted that Ex.PW1/C was filled by her husband. She also admitted that she has not attached the documents alongwith the admission form.
CS No. 243/18 Page 12 of 16
30. In Ex.PW1/X, it is clearly stated that in taking admission in class9 th, plaintiffs themselves modified the details in admission form. It is also stated that application Ex.PW3/11 forwarded to the CBSE who declined the same stating that the same cannot be considered after one year.
31. Perusal of the testimony of PW1 shows that particulars/details of the students sent to the CBSE on the basis of admission record of class6 th. However, this Court is unable to understand what is the use and purpose of filling admission form in 9th standard when the same is not considered for the purpose of class10th. Ex.PW1/C and Ex.PW1/D shows that correct particulars of the plaintiffs were filled and recorded in the record of defendant no.2. The defendant no.2 was supposed to ask for the requisite documents in support of the entries mentioned in Ex.PW1/C. The plaintiffs had done what they could have done. They tried their best. They filled the correct particulars in the admission form of class9 th/Ex.PW1/C and nothing more can be expected from them. It was for the defendant no.2 to seek clarification at the stage of admission in class9 th. Thus, defendant no.2 by accepting the Ex.PW1/C admitted the contents of particulars mentioned in the form. So, now, they cannot deny the authenticity/accuracy of the particulars mentioned in Ex.PW1/C. They are estopped from doing so. CS No. 243/18 Page 13 of 16
32. As far as limitation in filing the application before CBSE is concerned, the defendant no.1/CBSE vide notification dated 2018 themselves amended their byelaws and granted five years time for making correction in the name of candidate/father/mother.
33. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Jigya Yadav (Minor) Vs. CBSE & Ors." Civil Appeal No.3905/2011 passed on 03.06.2021 discussed the entire bye-laws of CBSE and held that "all the applications pertaining to the correction or change of name of candidate/father/mother/date of birth be processed by the CBSE as per the directions contained in para no.170 and 171 of the judgment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also directed the CBSE to take immediate steps to amend its bye-laws so as to incorporate the stated mechanism for recoding correction/change as the case may be, in the certificates already issued or to be issued by it."
34. Thus, even if the plaintiffs wants to get their names changed in the documents issued by the CBSE, still the same can be done as per the directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that "As regards, request of "change" of particulars in the certificate issued by the CBSE, it presupposes that the particulars intended CS No. 243/18 Page 14 of 16 to be recorded in the CBSE certificate are not consistent with the school records. Such a request could be made in two different situations. The first is on the basis of public documents like birth certificate, Aadhar card, election card, etc. and to incorporate change in the CBSE certificate consistent therewith.
35. Thus, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, even if the stand of the defendant/CBSE is considered to be correct, still, the plaintiffs are entitled for the change of their respective names in the documents issued by the CBSE.
36. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that despite the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the bye-laws has not been amended till date.
37. Under these circumstances, it is apparent that plaintiffs are entitled for the relief claimed by them. Hence, relief is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants to the effect that name of plaintiff no.1 be rectified in the CBSE record of their daughter Sheeba as "Munawer Ahmed"
and name of plaintiff no.2 be rectified in CBSE record of their daughter Sheeba as "Farzana Parveen".CS No. 243/18 Page 15 of 16
Thus, both the defendants are directed to correct the name of the plaintiffs as above said in all the documents issued by CBSE in the name of Sheeba.
Relief
38. The suit of the plaintiffs is decreed as to declaration and mandatory injunction in respect of correction in name of plaintiff no.1 as "Munawer Ahmed" and in the name of plaintiff no.2 as "Farzana Parveen" in CBSE record of their daughter namely Sheeba.
39. No order as to cost. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
40. File be consigned to record room.
Digitally
signed by
MANOJ
MANOJ KUMAR
KUMAR(Manoj Kumar)
Date:
2022.05.24
SCJ-cum-RC, East/KKD
17:03:24
+0530
Announced in the Court
today 24th of May, 2022
CS No. 243/18 Page 16 of 16